Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Pseudonymity versus anonymity: my new comment policy

Henceforth, please do not comment anonymously. I respect your right to withhold your true identity, but if that is your goal, please comment pseudonymously.

In discussions of blogs and, more recently, the "e-nnoyance" law, I find a surprisingly common tendency to confuse these different concepts. "Anonymous" means withholding any and all names of the author; "pseudonymous" means providing a fictional name -- a "handle" to you email/ chatroom/ blog types.

So rather than posting as "anonymous," please use a pseudonym or "handle" if not your real name, and use the same pseudonym or handle each time you comment. This is really for the enjoyment of me and other readers -- consistent use of a pseudonym allows us to associate a personality with the comment. It's just nicer and more fun.

But there is a quid pro quo. I resolve from now on to be more interactive with you commenters -- comments on comments!

I like the part about a more interactive comments section. That way I can conduct business on this site when Oscar fails to respond to regular emails, as sometimes happens.

One perplexing Q is what you'll be doing with persons who are not aware of your firm stance. Delete all Anons? It can be painful, esp. when the commenter is trying to be nice and simply does not know your new policy.

From this flows my suggetion that you really put it in some visible place on your blog, bold letters and all.

Anyway, good luck. Pure Anons really should be flushed out of the blog world.

The quid pro quo is to get the comments at all, Phantom, which I really can't make happen merely by ruling. Wendy, are you throwing a gauntlet at me? Clearly Nina is, by threatening to "transact business." But as long as we're transacting business, Nina, I'm sorry to have to admit that I still have a plate belonging to you and I chipped it. I'm still trying to figure out what sort of compensatory gift is suitable to return the plate with.